California Shootings Elliot Rodger Conspiracy.

a reply to: Kali74
In what case? I never heard about any second cars, but I have also never heard of any debunking on any second shooters.

a reply to: TKDRL

I have a feeling it won't matter if I post them and I'm not searching at 3am for nothing, sorry.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Kali74
No, you are saying we shouldn't discuss certain things, because it might cause someone not so right in the head to do something wrong, correct? At least that is the only way I can interpret "fostering extremism". We might as well shut down the forum altogether if we are to be worried about that.

Anyone participating in or running a forum like this has a moral responsibility to reign in malicious, delusional and unfounded allegations directed at innocent individuals who are the victims of tragedy.

Obama is fair game, the head of the Fed is fair game, David Icke is fair game.

Going after relatives of shooting victims who are exposed and in no way prepared to deal with something like this is wrong as is allowing it to happen. Plain and simple.

Wrong. If the media want to put victims on the TV or on a podium then we can say what we want about them, we can gather our own opinions of them. I do agree that families of victims should be sheltered and looked after and should not be played on by a media circus. But anything the media throws at us we have every right to have an opinion on. Not one person in this whole thread has been disrespectful about any other victims or their families. The only one people are taking a shot at is the one parading around in front of cameras, high fiveing and screaming gun control.

What about the conspiracy theories about the missing Malaysian flight MH370 are we being disrespectful or hurtful toward them families and victims for asking questions about it and calling it conspiracy. Are we being disrespectful by asking questions about police murders and brutality because it may hurt the victims feelings.

The way we get to the truth and the way we can show any victims any respect is to get the truth and question everything. Look at 9/11 imagine everyone just accepted the official story about that. You should feel lucky we live in a free world (for now) where we can question these things and get to the truth. I know that if anything ever happens to me or or my family or if I am caught up in some kind shooting I hope to god that people question it and get to the truth and I don't just die as part of collateral damage for some government agenda.

Look at the Bostom bomb suspect, he cannot even talk as they have silenced him forever by destroying his throat and voicebox.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: TKDRL

Well this thread is about 'crisis actors' why would they need those if it actually happened?

If you look at the first page of the thread, it says nothing about crisis actors. I was simply saying something doesn't feel right about the whole thing, I never pretended to know what or why it happened I just thought it was all a bit faked, in that either Elliot was cohersed into doing it with another passenger in the car pushing all the buttons or Elliot wasn't even there and this was carried out by some agency, and a few fake victims and family were thrown in to carry the agenda. Or that Elliot was some kind of Patsie used because of the things he was posting on the Internet.

People have said many times in this thread there have been over a hundred mass shooting, mass stabbings and mass murders carried out this year alone in the US and not one of them got hardly near the amount of media coverage this one has. Yet all were just as tragic.

We now have found a motive that government want to pass a law which prevents anyone with a history of mental illness to own a gun, you may say well that is a good idea what is wrong with that?....Well if you look at what the American government count as a mental illness you will see it is just about everyone on the planet, if you have ever suffered a panic attack, if you believe in conspiracy theories, in fact it is said about 67% of Americans have or will have some kind of mental health problem within their lifetime.

This Bill was being talked about only weeks before the shooting happened and Government is now shouting about the bill being put through.

I'm reading this stuff and it appears that some folk here have no concept whatsoever that people grieve in different ways. Some cry, some get angry, some go out to try and set the world right, some bottle it all up, some scream the house down etc.

Are you people really all that naive?

Not only that but don't you understand how news organisations work? They want ratings. This is a story of a seemingly good looking wealthy kid who has gone nuts and gone out on a killing spree. It's perfect news/drama fodder so they are going to flog it to death because they know people will watch it.

Not only that, but there also appears to be even more naivety around the fact that the press will camp (literally) outside victims family houses to try and capture the most sensational reaction they can - practically forcing families to make statements to buy themselves some peace.

I simply cannot believe the naivety I'm reading. You guys must live really sheltered existences.

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: Kali74
In what case? I never heard about any second cars, but I have also never heard of any debunking on any second shooters.

The eye-witness I saw interviewed earlier this week said there were two people in the shooter's car.

a reply to: Psynic

Eye witness can be very wrong you know.
Doesn't prove anything.

Hmmm... I'm not sure that the American Government considering some law about guns and mental health is any form of motive.

There's been hundreds of mass shootings in the US in recent years. The perpetrators of the very vast majority of these incidents have mental illness. As an outsider, my opinion about whether people with a history of mental illness should be allowed to buy guns counts for very little - but if you look at it dispassionately, any such move looks like an attempt to limit these shocking incidents.

Given the frequency of such incidents, it's not surprising at all that one should take place in a similar time frame to such a law being discussed.

In any event - this case is getting media attention because it's superbly packaged for media with hi-res videos, an unusual and intriguing motive, plenty of leading internet activity etc etc. It helps that it took place in a rich community and the perpetrator is vaguely connected to Hollywood. Simply put, it's a great story from a media perspective.

Of course, people will say that it's suspicious that it is so well packaged - but that's exactly what Elliot Rodger wanted to create for his legacy. People are saying his videos look staged - well, that's because they are staged. Elliot Rodger was a tearry eyed little bi tch, and he staged those videos to make himself look powerful and in control - everything he wanted to be, but wasn't. He's playing a character - just like every other delusional loser who uses violence to 'make even' with the world.

-**People questioning this event or those of you that believe this is a complete hoax** - you're not stupid. Don't listen to the masses. Using insults are the implications of being on the losing side. Albeit, they are nicely packaged, back-handed insults - they are still used for the same purpose. Do not let these people change the way you think using their herd mentality, bullying tactics of siding with the authority and the rest of society who just go with the flow. You are not weird and you should be proud of your questioning mind. There is still no empirical evidence tying this Rodgers boy to anything. Stay vigilant. I'm with you and I think this case stinks.

a reply to: cestrup

Thing is If you came up with any proof at all maybe people may listen to you.
So far you have given us this.

1) The father is a bad actor and not real because you thought he didn't look upset enough.
2) an eye witness statement which says two people may have been in the car.


Sorry you have to do better than this.

Just because you think it doesn't mean it is true.

So what do you think really happened by the way go on tell us...who did it?

a reply to: cestrup

I don't think it's unhealthy at all to look at this from a critical angle - I don't think personally that the American government would murder citizens as part of some kind of conditioning programme, but I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility.

However, there just doesn't seem to be a huge amount of evidence to support a non-conventional view of this specific incident... yet, of course.

There is, however, a fair bit of evidence that supports the conventional view. A couple of eye witnesses believing they saw two men in the car, for instance, does not negate the evidence of the many other people who believe they saw one.

I will accept that it muddies the waters a little though.

originally posted by: KingIcarus
a reply to: [post=17982804]cestrup[/post

I will accept that it muddies the waters a little though.

Much the same way an off-duty LEO in camo, apprehended in the forest fleeing from SH might, ahem, cloud the issue.

a reply to: cestrup

How about, instead of the childish jibe and rhetoric, you explain which parts of the points I raised are untrue?

Does none of that happen in your world?

a reply to: Psynic

Did that happen?.